Ok, I know it's the Mail but the facts of the story are there, plus there is a Video at the end of the article of the full incident.

To me, this seems like they didn't want the protest being filmed but couldn't use the old "anti-terrorism" excuse they used to.

For those that don't know, the Police used to try and confiscate camera's of people filming them using the
Terrorism Act 2000, claiming it was illegal to film them, when it actually only prohibited
taking images that would be used in the prosecution of a Terrorist Act. They were told a few years ago they shouldn't be doing this, so I suspect
this is a new tactic instead.

Dr Peers has made a complaint over wrongful arrest, false imprisonment and assault, which is to be reffered to the IPCC.

To me, this is exactly the same as the Plebgate affair - one Police officer has already been jailed
for lying in that with others under investigation. I sincerely hope the same happens to these Officers.

The Police in the UK do so by consent and without Public trust, that
"consent" is being eroded.

This man was not just falsely arrested, but prevented from going about his lawful business, and technically assaulted by an officer. In the video, it
is clear that he is pushed to the ground on one occasion, after one police officer tells him something like "get... off... with that" (one assumes
these remarks are made in reference to his camera gear).

This entire incident is an appalling breach of this gentleman's rights.

Things to take away from this:

1) Members of the public have the right to monitor and record the activities of the police, as long as the recordings are being made for non-criminal
purposes, such as in preparation for the commission of an act of terror, a robbery, or incitement to riot. Video being taken in order to protect the
civil liberties of innocent persons is not a criminal act, and preventing such recording is not permissible, or acceptable.

2) The police have changed tactics to allow them to prevent incidents being filmed by members of the public, from tactics involving terror
legislation, to accusing the camera operator of being drunk. While it is within a persons right to deny any request for breath tests for alcohol
consumption, if one is to remain in control of ones liberty, one might be advised to take the damned breath test, so that one can continue to operate
the camera in defense of his fellow citizens civil liberties.

3) The police are prepared to use physical violence on innocent parties, and infringe peoples civil liberties, despite there having been no technical
violations of the law. This must be born well in mind by all persons intending to protest, since it is best to be prepared for such circumstances
should the issue arise, since forewarned is forearmed, and having a snap reaction to breaches of ones rights in the heat of a moment, could lead to
one being arrested despite being technically in the right.

I can't say I'm shocked by this. I have experience terrible police overstepping in the same manner.

In England I had a police man and woman throw me into my mothers driveway by the neck and tell me I was going to go to jail for a "long time"
because I asked them why they were arresting my friend who was arrested for no reason (no reason given for arrest, no rights, etc).

We were walking back from the pub where we met our friend who was drunk. We had a quick pint and then went to get his scooter from my mothers where he
parked it earlier in the afternoon. We were doing this because he wanted to drive the scooter home so we locked his keys in my mothers house and
started to roll his bike home by hand so he was safe. We were walking it out of my neighbourhood when a woman in a house near my mums said the police
are coming because we were stealing a bike. I told the woman it was me and we were walking the bike home to be safe.

Then a police black mariah comes pulling into the street with about 10 cops all geared up and threw my friends to the ground. They arrested them
immediately and I was a few steps behind after explaining to the neighbour. Me and my other friend were not drunk at all so I said to the police "
This is ridiculous, tell me what you are arresting him for, and give me your names" Then they tell me " shut the F up or you're going in too" I
said " for what? you've arrested my friends, not given them any reason why or law they broke, and you haven't read them any rights" they then
grabbed me by the neck, walked me down the hill and threw me in my driveway and cut all my knees and grazed my hands. They never said why they were
being arrested.

I immediately called the police station who basically said its none of your business. A day later I receive a call from the friends who said they were
both being charged with drink driving. They needed time to come up with a reason for arrest AFTER they realised were were not stealing the bike.

I've had the same in the UK and the U.S., I actually had my quad bikes from my business stolen with a fake credit card by a pakistani gentleman in
manchester but the police questioned me like I was the bad guy and said these immigrants do this all the time and they weren't going to even bother
looking for fear of racism.

TrueBrit
1) Members of the public have the right to monitor and record the activities of the police, as long as the recordings are being made for non-criminal
purposes, such as in preparation for the commission of an act of terror, a robbery, or incitement to riot. Video being taken in order to protect the
civil liberties of innocent persons is not a criminal act, and preventing such recording is not permissible, or acceptable.

Exactly - it would do the Police well to remember this and the fact they are not above the Law themselves - especially now with the increased public
scrutiny after recent events.

TrueBrit
2) The police have changed tactics to allow them to prevent incidents being filmed by members of the public, from tactics involving terror
legislation, to accusing the camera operator of being drunk. While it is within a persons right to deny any request for breath tests for alcohol
consumption, if one is to remain in control of ones liberty, one might be advised to take the damned breath test, so that one can continue to operate
the camera in defense of his fellow citizens civil liberties.

Quite - refusing a breath test is technically, a criminal offence but the Police have to show reasonable cause before requesting one. He was within
his rights to refuse though, but it would have made his life easier had he simply done it to show he wasn't intoxicated.

TrueBrit
3) The police are prepared to use physical violence on innocent parties, and infringe peoples civil liberties, despite there having been no technical
violations of the law. This must be born well in mind by all persons intending to protest, since it is best to be prepared for such circumstances
should the issue arise, since forewarned is forearmed, and having a snap reaction to breaches of ones rights in the heat of a moment, could lead to
one being arrested despite being technically in the right.

I wouldn't go so far to say all Police - from what I've heard, some urban forces like the GMP or Met are worse than the county forces. Either
way though, this needs nipping in the bud before they all start thinking it is acceptable.

TrueBrit
4) THE LAW IS A MASSIVE ASS!

Hmmm - the Law is usually fairly reasonable, it's the interpretation of it that is usually where it falls down. This is how our system works
though, the kinks get removed by unfortunate incidents like this being called out. It's how the Police were stopped from confiscating camera's -
like the saying goes, you have to break a few eggs to make an omelette.

Well, yes - that much is obvious, hence why he has filed a complaint and it says in the article the charges were dropped by the prosecution as they
"offered no evidence".. This article is about his subsequent complaint to the force.

Well, yes - that much is obvious, hence why he has filed a complaint and it says in the article the charges were dropped by the prosecution as they
"offered no evidence".. This article is about his subsequent complaint to the force.

Yes, that's why I said you may be redirected. It was published yesterday, and updated today, essentially the story is the same from a few days ago, he
planned to sue from the start, here's the video,

I changed to a better url of the video, it goes back to January, there is also a full transcript of the encounter, and the hearing. The poilice
ignored the official complaint in January. Anyway the whole thing is being investigated now....no thanks to the police per se.

Sure officer, I'll show you my ID... Mind holding my beer while I get it out of the glove box?
Oh man, someone stole my car... Glad there's a cop around when I need one...

Hate to say it but I try to stay the hell away from cops.
They really don't need an excuse to haul your butt in, they just call it suspicion or attempting to evade...probable cause will get your door kicked
in, and or car searched.

Why they have books full of lame BS excuses to toss you in a cell and keep you locked up as long as they want to.

Somehow this guy made himself noticed when he should have kept his head down.

Want to know how I know that as fact?
I used to be an ICE agent... Not a field agent, but I knew a lot of them and their just as bad

In my experience, most Police in the UK aren't that bad, but you certainly get your nobheads, as you do in every walk of life.

My personal feeling on this is that some heads will roll - he has it all on camera and it's crystal clear who did what. This is analogous to the
Plebgate affair where Police lied to cover each other and it was a fuzzy CCTV image that undid them. GMP have really no wiggle room here and with the
scrutiny the Police are under lately, they will throw someone to the wolves just to shore up their rep.

In my experience, most Police in the UK aren't that bad, but you certainly get your nobheads, as you do in every walk of life.

My personal feeling on this is that some heads will roll - he has it all on camera and it's crystal clear who did what. This is analogous to the
Plebgate affair where Police lied to cover each other and it was a fuzzy CCTV image that undid them. GMP have really no wiggle room here and with the
scrutiny the Police are under lately, they will throw someone to the wolves just to shore up their rep.

It seems it is the video that caught them if you bear with me. The video was taken by the police from the man, and when it was returned "Because of
advanced storage technology" (quote from the youtube link) the man was able to recover the video. You can take what you like from that, but it seems
they didn't erase the video entirely, and that there was a back-up storage capability that they didn't know about. You need to ask the youtuber that
posted the video about that, he may well be the the Dr involved. The sergeant involved, (Keyhoe) is seemingly in another unrelated ontroversial law
case.

In my experience, most Police in the UK aren't that bad, but you certainly get your nobheads, as you do in every walk of life.

My personal feeling on this is that some heads will roll - he has it all on camera and it's crystal clear who did what. This is analogous to the
Plebgate affair where Police lied to cover each other and it was a fuzzy CCTV image that undid them. GMP have really no wiggle room here and with the
scrutiny the Police are under lately, they will throw someone to the wolves just to shore up their rep.

Yes they are , this is outrageous from
a senior police officer behaving in a criminal manner and has obviously no problem lying and assaulting this man . And what makes it even worse ,
he's clearly trying to encourage others offices to become complicit in his criminal acts . He's the one who should be arrested and charged .
Policing by consent is BS , when it suits them for the papers . We should all complain to our MP's about this and make it known we're not going to
consent to this kind of behavior from the officers WE employ through OUR taxes . SHAMEFUL

Yes they are , this is outrageous from a senior police officer behaving in a criminal manner and has obviously no problem lying and assaulting this
man . And what makes it even worse , he's clearly trying to encourage others offices to become complicit in his criminal acts . He's the one who
should be arrested and charged . Policing by consent is BS , when it suits them for the papers . We should all complain to our MP's about this and
make it known we're not going to consent to this kind of behavior from the officers WE employ through OUR taxes . SHAMEFUL

Any of those officers 'looking the other way' are just as bad. There would be an excuse for those that just happened in though.

adarma
Yes they are , this is outrageous from a senior police officer behaving in a criminal manner and has obviously no problem lying and assaulting this
man . And what makes it even worse , he's clearly trying to encourage others offices to become complicit in his criminal acts . He's the one who
should be arrested and charged .

Indeed and I agree - I think with the coverage the GMP have no choice but to hand this off to the IPCC which, I hope, will prosecute. The officer is
caught, clearly and unequivocally, on camera falsifying the accusations.

adarma
We should all complain to our MP's about this and make it known we're not going to consent to this kind of behavior from the officers WE employ
through OUR taxes . SHAMEFUL

Have you then? I often find people are more than happy to have a good whine, throw strong words around and say things to the effect of "we should do
x, y and z"... But rarely they do. As I and others on here have said in British "political" related threads on ATS, we only have ourselves to blame
for much of this as the general populace is apathetic.

And before you ask, no I haven't either. However, it does seem like a good idea, not least because my local MP is a Tory and quite a few of them
would love to stick the knife in to the Police after recent events...

adarma
Yes they are , this is outrageous from a senior police officer behaving in a criminal manner and has obviously no problem lying and assaulting this
man . And what makes it even worse , he's clearly trying to encourage others offices to become complicit in his criminal acts . He's the one who
should be arrested and charged .

Indeed and I agree - I think with the coverage the GMP have no choice but to hand this off to the IPCC which, I hope, will prosecute. The officer is
caught, clearly and unequivocally, on camera falsifying the accusations.

adarma
We should all complain to our MP's about this and make it known we're not going to consent to this kind of behavior from the officers WE employ
through OUR taxes . SHAMEFUL

Have you then? I often find people are more than happy to have a good whine, throw strong words around and say things to the effect of "we should do
x, y and z"... But rarely they do. As I and others on here have said in British "political" related threads on ATS, we only have ourselves to blame
for much of this as the general populace is apathetic.

And before you ask, no I haven't either. However, it does seem like a good idea, not least because my local MP is a Tory and quite a few of them
would love to stick the knife in to the Police after recent events...

I constantly complain to my MP , David Morris ( conservative ) He sends me nice emails back . But he always stays to the party line . He
doesn't seem to have any thoughts of his own . However he is the only line we can take , clearly you can't demonstrate peacefully or you would be
accused of drinking and arrested by corrupt criminal cops .

the copper instigating that is a real douche bag ....the drink driving crap was pathetic...so the copper was having a bad day and needed a victim to
make himself feel better about himself.......see give people power over others and they will abuse that power......the copper should be arrested for
false arrest and sacked from his job....public servant huh...hes a public menace

The Above Top Secret Web site is a wholly owned social content community of The Above Network, LLC.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.